Anthropological Study of Islam in the Media in the USAMedia, Terror and the Subjugation of the Other

The United States government utilizes the media to characterize
Islam as an enterprise of terror, thereby masking its own terrorist
activities, in order to create an atmosphere for homogenizing
the globe into the American popular culture. The clash between
the American and Islamic cultures is ideological. A contrast between
the two culminates in the subjugation that relegates Muslims to
being "other" and therefore unworthy of true recognition.
Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno (1944) describe the formation
of the "culture industry," which impacts society via
the subsumption of the masses into a means of production. In so
doing, individual expression is stifled and every detail is stamped
with an air of sameness. The media's portrayal of Muslims is a
stereotypical brand. The characterization of Islam as a religion
that has been hijacked by fundamentalists creates the atmosphere
for the continued clash of the differing ideologies.

Muslims in the Islamic Movement take on the responsibility
of eradicating forms of injustice. The responsibility of those
who practice Islam in the post-modern age is to reestablish order
in civilization. Following the principles and practices of the
Prophet Muhammad, peace and the blessings of Allah be with him,
who brings about this order. The global imperative from this perspective
begins with living a lifestyle free of earthly contaminates, while
continuing the effort to establish an Islamic state under the
leadership of a caliph. This is the movement that the U.S. government
seeks to restrain vis-à-vis the use of the press, which
portrays it as destructive. The word, terrorism, which evokes
consternation, rage and fear, is linked with the word Islam in
the minds of the American public . Terrorism is a descriptive
catalogue of violence. It, along with other descriptive terms
such as murderers, criminals and cowards arouses anxiety. These
terms, and the intent that precedes them, are used to represent
Muslims engaged in insurgency movements rather than more nominative
portrayals such as workers, helpers, activists or patriots.

The U.S. State Department (2003) defines terrorism as "premeditated,
politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant
targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents, usually
intended to influence an audience" (Jenkins, 2003, p. 4).
The key term here is "sub-national." This concludes
that state-run political violence is not terrorism. A paradigm
is therefore created by which the U.S. and its allies can perpetuate
violent political acts in order to enforce regime changes without
being deemed terrorists. Incidentally, the word terrorism itself
has no concrete definition. It is a moral dilemma. Hence, it is
fair for me to say, "One man's terrorist is another man's
freedom fighter." Political violence when perpetrated is
either accepted or rejected based upon one's connection with the
perpetrator.

Many Muslims, including myself, view the struggle of Islam
against the Western cultures injustice as a worthy one. When a
Muslim decides to wear a bomb, and destroy his enemy, he is utilizing
his only resource, himself, to make a statement for liberation.
The same is true when a youth throws a rock against a tank. He
is stating that he will sacrifice his life to uplift the cause
of Allah. Conversely, many Westerner's view those Muslims who
wear bombs to enact insurgency as "suicide bombers"
and "terrorists" rather than as martyrs and freedom
fighters.

An opinion survey conducted in Palestine (2002) shows that
more than eighty percent of Palestinian Arabs favored the use
of violence against Israel; two-thirds of those who responded
said they supported the use of martyr missions. Countless Muslims
view Palestine as an occupied land, taken forcibly. Therefore,
we believe it must be redeemed. The official declaration of Arab
States condemns terrorism and excludes from this term "acts
of peoples who combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever
means in order to liberate territories and secure the Arab right
to self-determination" (Jenkins, 2000, p. 4). Muslims use
instead terms such as freedom fighters, mujahids, resistance
fighters, soldiers, and martyrs to describe the actions of those
perceived by the West as terrorists. In an article entitled "Al
Qaida Claims Responsibility for the Black Out," (2003) the
authors write:

In The Name Of God, The Merciful, The Mercy-Giving
Operation Sudden Lightning In The Land Of The Tyrant Of The Age
"If you are suffering, they are suffering even as you suffer,"
[Qur'an, 4:104]

In compliance with orders of the Commander of the Mujahids,
Usamah bin Ladin (may God preserve him), to strike America's
economic links, the Abu Hafs al-Misri Brigades struck at two
important electricity generating targets in the region of the
American East, including the most important economic cities of
America and of Canada, (its ally in the war against Islam), the
cities of Toronto and New York, and the regions around them.
This strike resulted in a cut off of electricity from more than
fifty million persons. For security reasons, it is not possible
to clarify the manner in which the sabotage of these two points
was carried out, in case the mujahids might need to use the same
innovative method again soon, if God wills" (Jihadunspun.com).

Terrorism is not even-handedly depicted as applicable to non-state
and state perpetrators when reported by the U.S. press. It soon
became clear to the U.S. Government that the "War on Terrorism"
would be considered winnable if it were reduced by excluding any
other groups and targeting only Islamic nation states. In fact,
acts of terrorism perpetrated by other groups are both underreported
and underrepresented, including domestic terrorism, state terrorism
and its victims, and insurgent acts in Latin America, Far East
Asia and Africa. Herman and O'Sullivan (1984) found that as the
government moves to ally itself with a nation, it no longer considers
its violence terrorist:

As the Reagan administration rushed into warmer relations
with Argentina, Chile, Guatemala, and South Africa, it was obvious
that the leaders of these states were not "terrorists"
but were merely violating something called "human rights."
Terrorists were evidently those who used violence in opposing
governments (p. 44).

To expound upon the stereotyping of Islam, I reiterate, the
"War on Terrorism" began with the bombing of Afghanistan
in October 2001 and continues with the destruction and occupation
of Iraq in order to preempt a strike by what were dubbed as Weapons
of Mass Destruction (WMD). These WMDs have yet to materialize,
although thousands of Iraqi lives have been lost while the military
continues its search. Political violence perpetuated by individuals
and governments has the same effect. It seeks legitimacy. The
United States Government seeks validity through the utilization
of its resources. The role of the media is to legitimize state-run
terrorism and to make other acts of insurgency illegitimate. The
violence enacted by the state is perceived as necessary to achieve
the goals. Herman and O'Sullivan imposes this contradiction:

Management of the media is further aided by the force of patriotism.
Mass media proprietors and reporters generally believe in the
exceptional character of their country, the benevolence of its
leaders, and the justice of its government's positions vis-à-vis
other competing states. This allows them to be easily mobilized
in a struggle against allegedly threatening foreign enemies,
especially when their government invokes words like "terrorism"
and symbols of evil (p. 193).

To bring some assurance to the terrorist acts enacted by the
U.S. government, the media, consequently, has censored, buried
and under investigated the information on such acts. When the
U.S. military bombs a target, the target is only shown from a
bird's-eye view or in the dead of night, so that it is not easily
discerned. The victims are depicted as enemies of freedom and,
thereby, evil. This is especially true of network news programs
that reach an audience of approximately 25-30 million viewers
each evening ("Misperceptions", 2003). The following
are quotations from George W. Bush that were aired by the U.S.
media. He stated," Saddam Hussein is a grave threat to peace,
he has an arsenal of terror and possesses and produces chemical
and biological weapons." He continued by threatening, "Americans:
cannot wait for the final proof -the smoking gun - that could
come in the form of a mushroom cloud. After 11 years, during which
we have tried containment, sanctions, inspections, even selected
military action, the end result is that Saddam Hussein still has
chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities
to make more. And he's moving ever closer to developing a nuclear
weapon" (Folkenflik, 2003, www.sunspot.net).

The truth is that the intent of the U.S. is containment of
Iraq by means of the Gulf War and the application of subsequent
sanctions; as a result hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children
have been murdered. The weapons arsenals were destroyed, but along
with them, the sewage treatment and electrical systems (GNN.com).
However, alarmist quotations give rise to fear and anguish that
push the American public into a tailspin. The result is still
being felt daily. The war has thus far taken 8,500 Iraqi lives,
the lives of hundreds of U.S. soldiers, close to $100 billion
dollars has been spent, and there has been a strain on relationships
with the international community (ibid).

The U.S. press has made it its purpose to suppress the ideological
perspective of Muslims while promoting that of the American government.
The aim is to persuade the American public to view as necessary,
albeit severe, the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq and the countless
killings of Muslims throughout the globe. This condoned rage would
contrast with views of others throughout the world that receive
less censored news. There is an overwhelming number of misnomers
for terrorism to describe all acts perpetrated by Muslims. Currently,
the U.S. media has made little effort to investigate the allegations
of so-called terrorism perpetuated by Muslims. Colin Powell (cited
in "The Media", 2003) informs the United Nations Security
Council that "There is a poison plant in North East Iraq."
Luke Harding (ibid.), reporter for TheObserver,
wrote:

If Colin Powell were to visit the shabby Military compound
at the foot of a large snow-covered mountain, he might be in
for an unpleasant surprise. The US Secretary of State last week
confidently described the compound in north-eastern Iraq - run
by the Islamic terrorist group Ansar al-Islam - as a 'terrorist
chemicals and poisons factory.' Yesterday, however, it emerged
that the terrorist factory was nothing of the kind - more a dilapidated
collection of concrete outbuildings at the foot of a grassy sloping
hill. Behind the barbed wire, and a courtyard strewn with broken
rocket parts, are a few empty concrete houses, there is a bakery.
There is no sign of chemical weapons anywhere-only the smell
of paraffin and vegetable ghee used for cooking. In the kitchen,
I discovered some chopped up tomatoes but not much else"
("Revealed: Truth behind US 'poison factory 'claim,"
The Observer, February 9, 2003).

Reporters conducted this investigation from the U.S. network
ABC; however, the Secretary of State was never questioned as to
why he made such an assertion.

President Bush (2003) claimed in a press conference with Prime
Minister Tony Blair: "Today Italy rounded up yet another
cell of people who are willing to use weapons of mass destruction
on those of us who love freedom" (cited in "The Media",
2003). This comment is, of course, a false depiction of 28 Pakistanis
who were arrested on suspicion of plotting a terrorist attack
and then released because of insufficient evidence. The truth
was found, buried, on page 27 (ibid.).

The Washington Post (2002) reported:

As Bush leads the nation toward a confrontation with Iraq
and his party into battle in midterm elections, his rhetoric
has taken some flights of fancy in recent weeks. Statements on
subjects ranging from the economy to Iraq suggest that a president
who won election underscoring Al Gore's knack for distortions
and exaggerations has been guilty of a few himself (ibid.).

Yet, in spite of this attack on the President's misrepresentations,
the news media continues to mislead the American public in support
of the government's desire for hegemony. The United States' administration
is steeped in the Americanization of the post-modern world. The
result that it seeks is a homogeneous global community that is
dependant on popular American culture. This sameness and dependence
is reminiscent of Horkheimer and Adorno. It is their view that
popular culture would be consumed under the agenda of the "culture
industry". The mask of sameness would render the people hopeless.
This dependence is characterized by acts of violence that are
frighteningly similar to the original "Reign of Terror"
of the French. In her article, "The Loneliness of Noam Chomsky,"
Arundhati Roy (2003) writes:

Since the Second World War, the United States has been at
war with or has attacked, among other countries, Korea, Guatemala,
Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Libya, El Salvador, Nicaragua,
Panama, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Yugoslavia, and Afghanistan. This
list should also include the U.S. governments' covert operations
in Africa, Asia and Latin America, the coups it has engineered,
and the dictators it has armed and supported. It should include
Israel's U.S. backed war on Lebanon, in which thousands were
killed. It should include the key role America has played in
the conflict in the Middle East, in which thousands have died
fighting Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian territory.
It should include America's role in the civil war in Afghanistan
in the 1980's in which more than one million people were killed.
It should include embargos and sanctions that have led directly,
and indirectly, to the death of hundreds of thousand of people,
most visibly in Iraq (p. 9).

The death and destruction is perpetrated in the name of "freedom."
It is waged in order to secure the geopolitical aim of the American
Government, which appears to be the subjugation of the smaller
countries of the world. The United States continually perpetrates
political terrorism. These actions aim to psychologically control
individuals who reside in opposing nations. The level and magnitude
of the violence is clearly meant to overwhelm these states, given
the myriad killings of individuals. The U.S. Military has enacted
psychological operations (PSYOPS) in order to bring Iraqi nationals
under the fold of American dictatorship. Gert Van Langendonck
(2003) details the use of these "PSYOPS":

Mohammed's shop was one of five housed in Albu Hishma that
were partially destroyed on this day by the soldiers of the 1st
Battalion 8th Infantry, stationed near the town of Balad. Several
other villagers escaped the same fate by hurriedly covering up
the anti-American graffiti with mud. Today's mission was part
of a new, two-tiered approach to winning the hearts and minds
of the Iraqis in this area, notorious for its stiff resistance
against the U.S. 'We have tried to help these people and they
have thanked us by shooting at us... We want to make them understand
that there is a price to pay if they support the terrorist' said
Specialist Bledsoe (Guerrilla News Network. Com).

American soldiers, ironically, have named the town after the
slain rap music celebrity Tupac Shakur. They probably do not realize
that "shakur" is defined as thankful in Arabic. Americans
in the United States were told that the Iraqis should be thankful
for their liberation and that American soldiers would be showered
with flowers. However, the reality of occupation is a daily barrage
of bullets and bombs aimed at the U.S. forces. Increasingly ironic
is the realization that the "PSYOPS" tactics were originally
utilized in the Vietnam War. They were of no avail in that country
either.

Roy (2003) also states in her article:

Speaking about the September 11 attacks in New York and Washington
President George W. Bush called the enemies of the United States
"enemies of freedom." "Americans are asking why
do they hate us?" He said. "They hate our freedoms,
our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to
vote and assemble and disagree with each other" (p.4).

What Bush left out of the equation was that countless Muslims
hate the freedom to kill and maim indiscriminately in order to
gain new colonialism under the euphemism globalization. The belief
that the United States constitution has given the country the
right to act empirically has angered an immeasurable number of
Muslims (as well as Americans) who have felt the wrath of American
sovereignty. The American Dream of freedom, equality and hyper
globalization is not quite sanctioned by those involved in the
Islamic Movement who have a different dream. Masjid Al Islam Resolution
of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (1996) states:

We resolve to work with other communities, movements, without
regard of whether they are local, national, or international,
toward the end of harnessing the power of Muslims and their resources,
for the purpose of reestablishing the system of government known
as the caliphate, after the pattern of prophethood exemplified
by Prophet Muhammad (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)
(p. 2).

I conclude by stating that the goal of the Islamic revival
is the reestablishment of Islam globally with the purpose of defeating
the secular morality that has lead to the pervasive terrorism
that exists. This directly contradicts the American Dream, which
is based wholeheartedly on materialistic ideals. This ideological
clash is the essence of the paradox, which has led to the bloodshed
in Muslim lands. Unfortunately, the Americans will not relent
although they have themselves in a quandary. Senator Dick Lugar
(2003) stated on "Meet the Press": "At the end
of the day the President will be supported." His support
from many Americans is unyielding. The fear of Islam reigns along
with the ethnocentric. However, the clash of the Islamic and the
American cultures will continue indefinitely. In a speech given
in Indonesia, Dr. Imran Waheed (2003) stated: "All Muslims
desire to live by Islamic ideals" (Jihadunspun.com). Allah
has made it clear in the Quran that the final decision rests with
Him, and He doe not love those who are unjust or create mischief
in the land. My purpose is to bring to light the contradiction
of the United States government as it claims to fight for American
ideals. I hope to liberate my readers from continuing the subjugation
of Muslim ideologies through characterizations such as "terrorist"
in depicting those whose goal is Islamic unity. I hope that a
deeper understanding has been gained which will assist in combating
the American government as it moves towards the third world war.